Through: Mr. Ranjit Malhotra, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 4th September, 2012 whereby the leave to defend application filed by the Petitioner Smt. Vimla Soni was not considered by the learned Trial Court in an eviction petition filed by Rajeev Garg, the Respondent under Section 14 (1) (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (in short „the DRC Act‟), the Petitioner prefers the present petition.
2. The learned ARC vide the impugned order held that the leave to defend application was not filed within the period of 15 days as prescribed by law, hence denied leave to defend.
3. The controversy in the present petition revolves from the service of summons to Vimla Soni. A perusal of the Trial Court record would reveal that in an eviction petition filed by Rajeev Garg under Section 14 (1) (e) of the DRC Act notice was issued to Vimla Soni by the learned ARC on 16 th September, 2011 returnable for 19th January, 2012. The report qua service through Registered AD was that the premises was found locked but intimation was given and by ordinary process that the premises was found locked and on inquiry no information could be obtained. Thus on 19th January, 2012 the learned ARC directed the appearance of the Process Server for 1st March, 2012 whereafter on the same date at 11.45 a.m. a Memo of Appearance was filed on behalf of Smt. Vimla Soni by one Shri Ashok Singh, Advocate. The Memo of Appearance was taken on record and the file was put up for the date fixed, that is, 1 st March, 2012. On 1st March, 2012 when the Process Server Jasmer was present in person, one Shri Kahorngam Zimik, Advocate appeared as proxy counsel for Smt. Vimla Soni and sought time to file the vakalatnama. No explanation was rendered by the proxy counsel as to why the leave to defend application was not filed and the matter was listed for orders/further consideration on 10 th April, 2012. On 2nd April, 2012 an application for leave to defend under Section 25B (4) and (5) of the DRC Act was filed for which notice was issued to Rajeev Garg. Arguments were heard in the matter. On the next date, that is, 10 th April, 2012 and subsequent dates counsel for Vimla Soni sought time to file the judgments and thereafter on 28th July, 2012 filed two applications. Finally vide order dated 4th September, 2012 leave to defend application was dismissed being time barred and an eviction order was passed in favour of Rajeev Garg.